Greater Mexican Cession to the United States

Your mission if you chose to accept it... discuss and create an alternate time-line under these circumstances:

- The US having annexed Cuba before the Mexican American-war

- The US annexed a greater chunk of land at the end of the Mexican-American war

Mexican_Cession_to_the_US_by_JJohnson1701.png
 
- The US having annexed Cuba before the Mexican American-war
So fighting Spain pre-1840s? I don't think that would work out for the US to well. And if it did, and the US fought Mexico, it wouldn't really help them much, except maybe, with Cuba, the US would feel it necessary to be more maritime than OTL, so have more ships, and blockade Mexico more.
 
My vote is that slavery expands though there would be problems with a variety of Indian tribes and Meztizos, Creoles, etc that are interested in being the thrills of neither Dixie nor Mexico City.
 
So fighting Spain pre-1840s? I don't think that would work out for the US to well. And if it did, and the US fought Mexico, it wouldn't really help them much, except maybe, with Cuba, the US would feel it necessary to be more maritime than OTL, so have more ships, and blockade Mexico more.

Perhaps the US acquires Cuba during the time of the Adams-Onis Treaty or a bit before, at this point Spain was erupting in a civil war, it's empire was falling apart as wars for independence became popular and the economy was falling apart, I do not think having another War with the US was preferable. Have the United States occupy Cuba and legitimise its claims by paying the Spanish for it in Adams-Onis diplomatic negotiations and the US gets to keep Cuba for sure. However, how would you have the US create a Navy, from what I know politically it was not viable.
 
My vote is that slavery expands though there would be problems with a variety of Indian tribes and Meztizos, Creoles, etc that are interested in being the thrills of neither Dixie nor Mexico City.

Without a doubt in my mind Slavery would expand. However, would this issue with Native American tribes not be dealt with in the same manner it was? From what I know Yucutan wanted to join the US as a protectorate as the white population in Yucatan was being attacked by the natives to extinction.
 
Without a doubt in my mind Slavery would expand. However, would this issue with Native American tribes not be dealt with in the same manner it was? From what I know Yucutan wanted to join the US as a protectorate as the white population in Yucatan was being attacked by the natives to extinction.

There would be some difficulties trying to introduce slavery with so many dark skinned tribes around, who probably outnumbered pure whites by quite a bit.
 
There would be some difficulties trying to introduce slavery with so many dark skinned tribes around, who probably outnumbered pure whites by quite a bit.

This was never that big of a problem (a problem nonetheless) in early America. How bothered would they have been with the "white man" moving in? I'd assume if it were a problem at all the American's would have eventually have to massacre them as they did elsewhere. How difficult would this prove? With massive immigration I would think that White American's would eventually become the majority very quickly, even with many Native American tribes around they still were not that large in numbers.
 
Last edited:
This was never that big of a problem (a problem nonetheless) in early America. How bothered would they have been with the "white man" moving in? I'd assume if it were a problem at all the American's would have eventually have to massacre them as they did elsewhere. How difficult would this prove? With massive immigration I would think that White American's would eventually become the majority very quickly, even with many Native American tribes around they still were not that large in numbers.

I do not believe that massacres were general policy.
 
Your mission if you chose to accept it... discuss and create an alternate time-line under these circumstances:

- The US having annexed Cuba before the Mexican American-war

- The US annexed a greater chunk of land at the end of the Mexican-American war

Like this?
pwXoy.jpg
 
How densily populated were these territories? The USA could certainly not absorb these territories the same way they did with the territories they did annex IOTL...
How would the USA deal with a large autoctonous Hispanic population in the mid-19th century?
 
How densily populated were these territories? The USA could certainly not absorb these territories the same way they did with the territories they did annex IOTL...
How would the USA deal with a large autoctonous Hispanic population in the mid-19th century?

I think the northern tier of OTL Mexican states is fairly underpopulated compared to elsewhere, but still more heavily populated than OTL's Mexican Cession.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_New_Mexico#American_Territory

New Mexico's statehood was delayed at first due to the free-slave issue and later by questions on whether it was fully "assimilated."

I imagine you'd have a lot more of this kind of thing if the US snagged northern Mexican territories. The slave thing might be a bigger deal with states immediately south of Texas.
 
This was never that big of a problem (a problem nonetheless) in early America. How bothered would they have been with the "white man" moving in? I'd assume if it were a problem at all the American's would have eventually have to massacre them as they did elsewhere. How difficult would this prove? With massive immigration I would think that White American's would eventually become the majority very quickly, even with many Native American tribes around they still were not that large in numbers.

The Mayan would be pretty damn bothered, they already hated the white upper class of the Yucatan, rebelled, and won, setting up an independent if unrecognized state that controlled much of the Yucatan. I don't see the Americans being able to do better against Chan Santa Cruz when sending troops thousands of miles away from where they came from into territory they are utterly unsuited for.

Also the issue I see here is that the Indians of the American South West where mostly nomadic hunter gatherers who could be uprooted by farmers with great ease as they could force them off their hunting grounds. The Indios of Mexico are by and large sedentary subsistence farmers who have been ruled by white landlords for hundreds of years. Uprooting their existing social structure and hierarchy is going to be much harder because these are people who have been actively resisting assimilation since the days of Cortes. Also there are far more of them than there ever where in the Southwest.
 
Mexico had abolished slavery a generation before and as mentioned before telling millions of Indio peon farmers working essentially as medieval serfs that they'd now be slaves under American law likely revives the same warriors that threw out the Spanish Empire 30 years before after 300 years. Coming to an accommodation with a mostly Indio/Mestizo population with hard won rights seems more likely to collapse Negro slavery in the U.S. (which was modeled on Indio slavery in the Carribbean sugar plantations anyway) or greatly constrain it rather than spread it.

Cuba would a much easier integration at that time but the wealth of it's own sugar exports would more likely mean a Spanish Empire/Frontier America war at this time with Spain far stronger and comparable than in 1898. Helping the Cubans throw out the Spanish is a much different proposition than a weak neighbor with a long history of dispossessing anyone else from established farms, plantations, towns, etc., just like the Phillipine Insurrection. Probably would come in as a slave state but one in chaos.

Seizing and holding that much more of Mexico during the Mexican-American War does seem viable given what was actually accomplished and after the invasion of Mexico City. Probably no Gadsden Purchase/reparations so those funds could develop the new territories which include a lot of mining by the late 19th century so silver rushes probably add a lot of American/European population and investment as well as drive both a Southern route transcontinental railroad in the 1850's and lots of short lines to the mines, ports, etc. as it did in the U.S. but not as much in Mexico with centrally-controlled rail development. That'd do a lot for the population from raising ag prices, dropping the price of manufactured goods from distant cities/ports, encouraging manufacturing, improving bridges and roads considerably, booming some places like Ciudad Juarez, Tampico, Matamoros, Vera Cruz, Acapulco, etc. that'd end up following much the same path as Arizona, New Mexico, and Colorado. Along with mining, this grabs much of Mexico's most accessible petroleum deposits and a lot of timber and cattle pasturage, 20th Century Mexico would be far poorer because of that loss (oil is 40% of the federal revenues now) but a lot easier to coherently govern and administer (governors would have far less power.)

If the American Civil War did take place, and I think this scenario greatly diffuses that risk, the Union Naval blockade would be stretched too thin with the thousands of additional miles of Atlantic and Pacific coastline if Confederate or taking the apparent opportunity to secede themselves as a new country no longer beholden to Madrid, Mexico City, or Washington D.C....Utah would likely too and so many fronts would likely bring a negotiated secession instead of 10 years of war everywhere.

It's easy to underestimate Mexico and Spain then and overestimate what the U.S. had before the coming build up.
 
The Mayan would be pretty damn bothered, they already hated the white upper class of the Yucatan, rebelled, and won, setting up an independent if unrecognized state that controlled much of the Yucatan. I don't see the Americans being able to do better against Chan Santa Cruz when sending troops thousands of miles away from where they came from into territory they are utterly unsuited for.

Also the issue I see here is that the Indians of the American South West where mostly nomadic hunter gatherers who could be uprooted by farmers with great ease as they could force them off their hunting grounds. The Indios of Mexico are by and large sedentary subsistence farmers who have been ruled by white landlords for hundreds of years. Uprooting their existing social structure and hierarchy is going to be much harder because these are people who have been actively resisting assimilation since the days of Cortes. Also there are far more of them than there ever where in the Southwest.

A bunch of Alabama civil war vets were hired once to fight the Maya. They all died terribly from diseases, arrogance, and constant ambushes.
 
Top